ON "NARRATIVES"

Thursday, April 28, 2016

A Vote for #Neither

Though the 2016 GOP presidential nomination has not yet been settled as of this date, it is looking more and more likely that Donald Trump will become the nominee. This prospect has demoralized many, compelling us to confront difficult decisions about what to do on Election Day.

As I witness the slow, gradual, resigned acceptance within the
Republican Party of Donald Trump (and within the Democrat Party of
criminal Hillary Clinton and socialist Bernie Sanders), by more and more
people -- people who, during a more civilized moment just months ago,
would never have tolerated the likes of such creatures -- I am reminded
how a culture becomes corrupted, then lost.

The late Senator Daniel
Patrick Moynihan -- a thoughtful, pre-Clintonian Democrat and champion
of Western civilization -- memorably described the process he called
"defining deviancy down." It amounted to slowly lowering the bar of
moral and intellectual standards, of social and cultural expectations,
inch by inch. Pretty soon, what was unthinkable in January and
intolerable in March becomes tolerated in June, then accepted in August
-- and finally celebrated by November.

Why celebrated?

Because in order to accommodate and accept the once-intolerable, a
person must surrender his standards, piecemeal . . . but then rationalize
his self-corruption in his own mind. How better to rationalize the
despicable -- and one's own acceptance of it -- than to turn it into
virtue, and the despicable person into a non-conforming hero?

I want my friends, some of whom are Trump or Hillary supporters, to understand how seriously I take this corruption.

I am not a bandwagon-joiner. I am not one to stick ‪#‎NeverTrump‬
hashtags everywhere. But neither can I tolerate this crude, ignorant,
unprincipled narcissist simply because the alternative would be to vote
for a criminal like Clinton. Trump represents the culmination of a
process of corruption within the Republican Party, just as Hillary
Clinton represents the same within the Democrat Party. To my great
sadness, they have come to symbolize and accurately reflect the
character of an American people who have, for decades, been defining
deviancy down in their own lives and institutions.

I realize that
an election is merely a tactical decision, almost always between
less-than-ideal options. Oftentimes it is a choice for the lesser harm.
But -- and I'm being stone-cold serious -- in a choice between Trump and
Clinton, I have no clue who would cause the greater long-term harm to
America or to my own values and interests. An unprincipled populist
demagogue, whose answer to all problems, foreign and domestic, is an
international trade war -- or a pathological criminal
with a progressive agenda? We're not talking about two characters who
would continue the status quo of steady American decline. We're talking
about two human wrecking balls. Each, in his or her own way, would
accelerate American decline in a host of political, economic, and cultural ways.

The latter is what concerns me most, because it
affects the character of America. As they say, "character is destiny."
While these two bottom-feeders sadly reflect the country's slide into
decadence, a national leader of character might decelerate that decline.
Trump and Clinton would both hasten it.

It might be argued that Trump at
least represents what Ayn Rand would have called "the American sense of
life," which Hillary Clinton and the left despise and hate. But it would be more accurate to say that Trump has hijacked the American sense of life. He has hitched that pro-American spirit to an anti-American policy
agenda, foreign and domestic. He does not stand for constitutionally
limited government, free markets, private property, or individual
rights. He is trying to wed "Americanism" to populist statism, and call
it "conservatism."

That's bad enough on the level of political
philosophy, and it would be disastrous on the policy level. But on the
more-important level of personal character, Trump would bring into the
Oval Office a gutter mentality and behavior, power-hungry narcissism,
crude anti-intellectualism, and a mindless personality cult. Yes,
America has elected and endured presidents who exhibited one or more of
these various ugly traits; however, I cannot recall any single president
who embodied them all.

For
decades, every time the GOP put forth some lousy liberal loser, we individualists and constitutionalists were told to put aside our reservations and support him at the polls. It was just a short-term compromise, they told us, because
we had to beat the Democrat du jour if we hoped for America to survive until the long term, when we might get better candidates. Well, Donald Trump
is the long term that all those short-term, expedient compromises have
brought us to. If he were to be elected, there would be no long-term future for principled individualists to hope for.

On the other hand, a vote for Hillary Clinton
would be a vote for a pathological liar and crook, for an explicit proponent of statism and unlimited government power. And it would be a moral
ratification of her unspeakable betrayal of four brave dead American
patriots in Benghazi. That is intolerable.

Because of these
considerations (and barring last-minute, unexpected, radical
changes of circumstances in an insane year filled with surprises), I've come reluctantly to a decision:

Should the
electoral alternatives sink to a choice between Trump or Clinton, I
shall vote for neither.

I care too much for America's
founders, for those who fought and bled and died for this special
nation, to dishonor their memory and legacy with such a vote.

If our
nation truly has come to this, then I believe the November 2016 election will be
remembered as America's Jonestown -- and I, for one, shall refuse to
participate in moral self-poisoning and political mass suicide.

1 comment:

Sextus Empiricus
said...

Trump is a mixed bag, like all other major politicians. Your objection to him otherwise seems to be largely stylistic--that he's a brawler. We probably agree about the areas where Trump is bad. But why write as if only the negative part of the picture is relevant? And why assume that the only way to fight the vicious left is with a bland and self-repressive decorum? Now that we're rid of the Obamacare tax and have seen the other pro-freedom steps Trump has taken, maybe you can amend your judgment. Clinton would not have supported any effort to deregulate or peel back any aspect of Obamacare.

About Me

I'm a best-selling author and an award-winning journalist and editor. My first novel, "HUNTER," hit #4 on the Kindle Bestseller List and #1 in "Mysteries & Thrillers," as well as the Wall Street Journal's "Top Ten Fiction Ebook" list. It's available as a Kindle ebook and a trade paperback at Amazon.com; an audiobook edition is available through Amazon, Audible.com, and iTunes.

The sequel, "BAD DEEDS" won the CLFA "Book of the Year 2014 Award." WINNER TAKES ALL -- the third installment in my Dylan Hunter thriller series -- was released in late 2017 to rave reviews.

I've contributed to Reader's Digest, The Boston Herald, PJ Media, and many publications.

Be sure to visit my FICTION blog, "The Vigilante Author," at: www.bidinotto.com, where I discuss thrillers, publishing, and the hero of my bestselling thrillers, Dylan Hunter -- "the new face of justice."